843 Punch-Drunk Love

[ianthemovie]

And yet, this film was made by someone who genuinely liked Adam Sandler. Thus, it wasn't made to spite him or make him look ridiculous. Nor do I think this was the proverbial "put lipstick on a pig" and trying to make him into something else (or "dumb comedian" turned "art-house darling" and all done for smug irony). I think it was a way of channeling his genuine strengths and make it into something more than just a shtick.

PTA does seem to have a particular talent for bringing out the best in actors whose talents have been dulled or neglected by other projects (Tom Cruise and Mark Wahlberg being other examples). Anderson has admitted that he genuinely loves low-brow comedies like Billy Madison and Ted. I agree that he's able to bring out other aspects of these actors' registers without being condescending. It always seems to come out of a genuine impulse: "I love this actor and his work and I want to try him out in this different type of role."

[Roger Ryan]

One thing that interest me is why Carry, Sandler and sadly Williams didn't continue doing serious roles. Was it that they weren't offered more serious roles?

I wouldn't put Williams in the same category; he consistently took on serious roles throughout his film career even though the films were rarely as good as a Punch-Drunk Love or Eternal Sunshine. He actually appeared in three dramas released during the last year of his life (The Butler, The Face of Love and Boulevard).

[Feiereisel]

And yet, this film was made by someone who genuinely liked Adam Sandler. Thus, it wasn't made to spite him or make him look ridiculous. Nor do I think this was the proverbial "put lipstick on a pig" and trying to make him into something else (or "dumb comedian" turned "art-house darling" and all done for smug irony). I think it was a way of channeling his genuine strengths and make it into something more than just a shtick.

PTA does seem to have a particular talent for bringing out the best in actors whose talents have been dulled or neglected by other projects (Tom Cruise and Mark Wahlberg being other examples). Anderson has admitted that he genuinely loves low-brow comedies like Billy Madison and Ted. I agree that he's able to bring out other aspects of these actors' registers without being condescending. It always seems to come out of a genuine impulse: "I love this actor and his work and I want to try him out in this different type of role."

His frequent casting of stand-up comedians in supporting roles speaks to this as well. It's Altmanesque, too--along the lines of Jim Bouton in The Long Goodbye--which isn't surprising.

[dda1996a]

One thing that interest me is why Carry, Sandler and sadly Williams didn't continue doing serious roles. Was it that they weren't offered more serious roles?

I wouldn't put Williams in the same category; he consistently took on serious roles throughout his film career even though the films were rarely as good as a Punch-Drunk Love or Eternal Sunshine. He actually appeared in three dramas released during the last year of his life (The Butler, The Face of Love and Boulevard).

The fact I haven't heard of any of them except The Butler and he was one of the supporting actors there. I meant films more akin to One Hour Photo Insomnia and Good Will Hunting (or I guess DPS which I really dislike). Anyway the other two are even more rather sad cases of returning to safer roles.

[knives]

You should check out Boulevard at least.

[flyonthewall2983]

Steve Martin is someone I feel who could still have a lot of untapped potential as a serious actor. Planes, Trains & Automobiles is one of my favorite films in large part because he plays it incredibly straight when called upon, but can still be hilarious in other parts too. Same for John Candy, who sadly only had one other shot at it (and hit it out of the park) when he did the small role in JFK.

[mfunk9786]

Then watch Shopgirl, and then you'll understand why this doesn't always work

[flyonthewall2983]

I think if he connected with someone, like Bill Murray did with Wes Anderson or Jim Jarmusch, it could have been better off for him in that way. Writing for himself definitely worked with the comedies he's written but maybe not as much when it comes to something more straight.

Strangely enough I think Jon Lovitz is someone who could have done more serious work but I don't think he's ever been interested too much into going outside the box. It's been a long time since I've seen it but he plays kind of a tragic character in Mr. Destiny and it worked well.

[domino harvey]

Lovitz is unforgettable in the opening scene of Happiness

[flyonthewall2983]

I have also heard he was suitably menacing in Southland Tales

[Dead or Deader]

Miranda July

[The Elegant Dandy Fop]

So, I can easily say I love this movie. I saw it initially when it was released on DVD, and as a mopey teenager filled with self-hate, angst and sexual frustration (now I'm an adult with all those feelings), this movie struck a particular chord. It was the perfect film for a budding cinephile and his newly bought DVD player to experience. And as an adult, it's a relief to say it's still as great as ever, but now that I'm maybe better adjusted *snicker*, I found this film to be funnier than ever. I was laughing the whole way through, especially through the tense moments as the warehouse collapses around Barry Egan during his second meeting with Lena. And the perfectly anti-climatic showdown with the Mattress Man (featuring Phillip Seymour Hoffman at his greasiest) kills me with his last "that's that", all to the tune of Conway Twitty's wonderful "Lonely Blue Boy".

This said, it was a bit of a disappointment to see mostly the same extras recycled. The new Cannes interview is fantastic and actually made me appreciate P.T. Anderson as he puts down reporter after reporter with confused looks and single worded answers. The perfect way to sedate mediocre journalists! And Jon Brion (whose wonderful solo album, Meaningless, rides beautifully on that wave of 60s nostalgia of the late-90s) gives an excellent interview that gives you an idea of how important Anderson approaches his musical scores.

But! I must've given a muttered a few "oh brothers" over Miranda July's essay and the interview about Jeremy Blake between the two curators. I never had a problem with Miranda July before. I never saw The Future, but enjoyed Me and You and Everyone We Know quite a bit. I tried reading a collection of her short stories and found them to be solipsistic beyond belief. And her essay is no better. I totally understand if a director like P.T. Anderson doesn't want his film to include an essay that's just another critical analysis of his film, but her essay is about nothing but her and her life with brief mentions of how the movie fits in there. It's not even a joyous, personal read like Richard Linklater's notes on Two-Lane Blacktop. It's just another piece of Miranda July nonsense that just leads to head scratching in confusion. Seems more like a manifesto for Miranda July than the impact of the movie on her.

And the interview between Michael Conner and Lia Gangitano is equally awful. Perhaps because I often work in the world of modern art, I constantly deal with artists who have no clue what they are talking about or what they're doing (and are paid to do it), and hide it behind words they read in books by David Foster Wallace. Conner quietly interjects with a few interesting notes and helps guide you along Jeremy Blake's career (something I knew very little about before this), but Lia Gangiano is insufferable. Her comments are often meaningless and sound like sub-community college art theory, especially when Blake's art is plainly on screen for you to admire and examine. And she can't deliver a comment with a single iota of confidence. Every declarative sentence she says ends with, what sounds like a question, and it just drives me up a wall and sucks the air out of the interview. Maybe it's my jaded attitude from having attended multiple lectures on modern art, so excuse me if my negative comments about this special feature sound like they are coming from a personal place (my blackened heart), but it's still worth watching just to see Blake's art.

[mfunk9786]

I saw it initially when it was released on DVD, and as a mopey teenager filled with self-hate, angst and sexual frustration (now I'm an adult with all those feelings), this movie struck a particular chord.

Imagine lending this to your future wife, and having her respond with "Oh, I met a guy at that concert we were at last week - he's coming over and this'll be the perfect thing to watch, thanks!"

I wouldn't know anything about that. But if I DID, I would tell you that it's rough.

(Hi, LQ.)

[domino harvey]

Almost as awkward as me choosing tonight to have Miranda July over to read the forum

[flyonthewall2983]

Got this last night. First time seeing the movie from start to finish in a long time. The end credits are a treat to listen to in surround sound.

[FrauBlucher]

I watched the blu and I have to say the supps are better than I expected. I enjoyed the Brion interview and the piece on Blake. Very interesting. And the Cannes Q&A and press conference is terrific. But Anderson doesn't seem very comfortable talking about his films.

Here's a little anecdote... I went to see a q&a with Anderson after a screening of There Will Be Blood. The moderator was James L Brooks. They spent almost the entire time talking about the novel, Oil, with very little discussion about the film itself. And when they weren't talking about Oil, they were going off on a tangent discussing various pieces of literature. I left after 40 minutes. I heard they only touched on the film a little afterwards. Brooks did an awful job steering the discussion towards the film. Unless that was intentional.

The bluray looks excellent. Really enjoyed this whole package.

[domino harvey]

That sounds awesome, why would you walk out on that?

[FrauBlucher]

Well Domino, in part it was frustration that they weren't talking about the film, as well as I had to be up 4am the next morning. So, I decided to cut it short. But they only continued on for another 15 minutes. There was a fair number of folks that left before me. It really wasn't as interesting as it sounds. They were kind of rambling on.

[Cronenfly]

I too second the thumbs-up on the supplements. Brion offers a more coherent discussion of Anderson's artistic rationale and working methods than the man himself probably ever could/would, even though he is only talking about the film's soundscape for the most part. I found the Blake piece not quite as compelling, but the two interviewees are exceptionally well-matched and knowledgeable. Was not aware that Blake did a show named Spectacular Optical, after the company in Videodrome, and at least in part inspired by some of Cronenberg's work. Have not parsed the rest of the set yet, but these two features alone plus the spiffy new transfer make this a must for anyone even half-interested in the film.

[flyonthewall2983]

How the panel at Cannes handled some of the more banal questions (Hoffman particularly) was amusing. I liked the Jon Brion interview too, it was interesting to me that he said he liked Jonny Greenwood's work. I thought after their work on this and Magnolia (which has a terrific score) they'd be attached at the hip. I also liked the Abbey Road footage, especially Brion just riffing on a piano for about a minute towards the end. He has a very particular touch that is very much his signature.

[mfunk9786]

Here's a little anecdote... I went to see a q&a with Anderson after a screening of There Will Be Blood. The moderator was James L Brooks. They spent almost the entire time talking about the novel, Oil, with very little discussion about the film itself. And when they weren't talking about Oil, they were going off on a tangent discussing various pieces of literature. I left after 40 minutes. I heard they only touched on the film a little afterwards. Brooks did an awful job steering the discussion towards the film. Unless that was intentional..

I will never forget going to an early December NYC screening of the film with Anderson, Daniel Day Lewis, and Kevin J. O'Connor in attendance. Somehow we'd wound up with aisle seats toward the back of the auditorium, which was just a standard AMC layout. As soon as I'd heard "I'm finished!" and the music swelled, I turned over my right shoulder and Daniel Day Lewis was standing right the fuck there waiting to be introduced for the Q&A and grinned at me. I have never felt so much like I've seen a ghost, I jumped out of my skin and quickly turned away. Earrings and dapper hat and genuine smile and all. Probably not the polite and/or starstruck response he was expecting back.

Oh, and they talked about the movie during the Q&A.

[colinr0380]

I hope he wasn't holding a bowling pin at the time mfunk, as that could have been even more unnerving!

[mfunk9786]

He looked so different (see the pic I linked to) but after sitting with that movie, looking at his face for 2 and a half hours, he might as well have been in full costume. I was immediately startled.

[manicsounds]

Surprised at the tech info saying this was a "high definition transfer" rather than 2K or 4K which is the norm for most Criterions and even major studio releases. Wonder why they settled on a HD master in this day and age. But with the glowing reviews, I assume it just looked great at 1080p that they didn't need a whole new transfer.

[solaris72]

I vaguely recall hearing something about PTA having supervised the HD transfer for blu-ray several years ago for Sony, probably that transfer, though presumably only done at 1080p, was found to be perfectly good (sure looks great to me).